Sign up today for Post Pro Picks, The Post's free, weekly NFL pick 'em game, where you can win great prizes, form groups to play against your friends, see how you fare against our experts or just play for fun. Register at http://washingtonpost.com/pro-picks

By the way, Russell Okung visited on Monday

With everything that's happened since Sunday night, there's a lot we simply haven't had time to address - left tackle Russell Okung's visit atop the list.

The former Oklahoma State offensive lineman left Redskins Park on Monday afternoon after a "fantastic visit," his agent, Peter Schaffer, said Monday night in a phone interview. "He really liked the coaching staff, the entire environment and everything about the organization. We'll see."

The team's stunning trade for former Philadelphia Pro Bowl quarterback Donovan McNabb would seem to indicate Coach Mike Shanahan is adept at concealing his true intentions for the roster. The Redskins currently hold the fourth overall pick in the April 22-24 draft and just acquired a potential Hall of Fame quarterback, so drafting Okung, if he is available, would appear to be the prudent move, especially since the Redskins do not currently have a left tackle on the roster.

But will Shanahan lead the Redskins down that path?

"You don't control that," Schaffer said of the Redskins' draft plan. "Whoever drafts Russell is going to ... get an exceptional young man and player."

That's the difference between our Skins and other successful organizations. Others draft to win for years to come. We make moves to win for next year.

Posted by: dcwun | April 5, 2010 9:20 PM

`

I'm pretty sure other organizations are successful because of their QB play. How was Arizona doing before Warner?

Teams that win consistently have a consistent QB. If you look at our playoff years 2005 and 2007 this decade, you will find that QB play was the difference. Brunell had one of his best years as a pro in 05 and Collins played lights out in 07.

the guy did have protection. I saw so many plays where he had 4 seconds to throw standing there....and he can't make a desion...how can a guy be labeled that he holds the ball too long bu all the experts and not have time? So the fact he..he has had time..he just sux

the guy did have protection. I saw so many plays where he had 4 seconds to throw standing there....and he can't make a desion...how can a guy be labeled that he holds the ball too long bu all the experts and not have time? So the fact he..he has had time..he just sux

Posted by: leevi98 | April 5, 2010 8:27 PM

You have to take into account they run those replays in slow-motion.

Posted by: skinfanman | April 5, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

i'm watching full speed...i dvr every Skins game on the nfl ticket feature "NFL Replay" they show the games in a half hour..no commercials...no haddles...just plays.

I'm pretty sure other organizations are successful because of their QB play. How was Arizona doing before Warner?

Teams that win consistently have a consistent QB. If you look at our playoff years 2005 and 2007 this decade, you will find that QB play was the difference. Brunell had one of his best years as a pro in 05 and Collins played lights out in 07.

Posted by: Vicc

The 2 Pro Bowl WR had a lot to do with that too. They made PBs even when Matt Leinhart was the QB.

I hope I'm wrong about this. They better get someone to protect him though.

And all of them were with there current teams for a few years outside of Favre. Again, exception and not the rule.

Posted by: dcwun | April 5, 2010 9:09 PM |

I find it amusing how when people get called out for being wrong they can't just say "I was wrong." They gotta go and change the whole premise. Dude, the premise was that 33 was too old and you're point was that those 2 qb's were the exeption to the rule. Well 7 out of 12 qb's over 30 is more like the rule and you were wrong. So instead of owning it you then say well, those guys had been with there teams for a while. Changed the premise. Just own it dude. You were wrong.

I find it amusing how when people get called out for being wrong they can't just say "I was wrong." They gotta go and change the whole premise. Dude, the premise was that 33 was too old and you're point was that those 2 qb's were the exeption to the rule. Well 7 out of 12 qb's over 30 is more like the rule and you were wrong. So instead of owning it you then say well, those guys had been with there teams for a while. Changed the premise. Just own it dude. You were wrong.

Posted by: scampbell1975

My argument has never been about age, its about effectiveness. The iggles give up their "Franchise" QB to start an uproven Kolb? If they though he was a threat, they would not have traded him within the division ala Favre with Packers/Vikes.

My argument has never been about age, its about effectiveness. The iggles give up their "Franchise" QB to start an uproven Kolb? If they though he was a threat, they would not have traded him within the division ala Favre with Packers/Vikes.

That doesn't seem strange at all to you?

Posted by: dcwun | April 5, 2010 10:02 PM

Not as cut and dry as you make it seem. Kolb forced Philly's hand by saying he will not sign an extension if he is not the starter in 2010. That would mean that they would have to franchise him in 2011 or let him walk.

Reid wanted McNabb, but was outvoted by their FO. Reid made sure to do right by DM, so he is a Redskin.

My argument has never been about age, its about effectiveness. The iggles give up their "Franchise" QB to start an uproven Kolb? If they though he was a threat, they would not have traded him within the division ala Favre with Packers/Vikes.

That doesn't seem strange at all to you?

Posted by: dcwun | April 5, 2010 10:02 PM |

Well if that was the premise then I do not know the answer. Strange? Eh, maybe. Stranger things happen in the NFL all the time. Sometimes teams cater to the fans. Philly can be a rough town for sports. I've always thought McNabb was a choker but he sure is a more proven commodity than Kevin Corncob. Seems like a similar situation that occured in Green Bay with Rogers/Favre. Without the ridiculousness of Favre that is. All I know is that I have no idea what the real reasons behind this were for Philly and that we now have the best quarterback (although maybe a choker) that we have had in many, many years.

Thanx, the evidence is overwhelming and I guarantee we will post a winning record with McNabb as a starter! If McNabb gets injured for a few games we will struggle to win those games.

Posted by: Vicc | April 5, 2010 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Worse comes to worse..i think Rex is not a bad back up QB to fill in if need be.....How many back up young Qbs are out there that have deep run and super bowl experience that was in K, Shanny's system for a year already? i think this is shaping up fairly well.

Philly knows McNabb better than anyone. As smart as that organization has been, do you really think they would trade him to a division rival if he had anything left? C'mon!

Posted by: dcwun | April 5, 2010 9:34 PM |
====================
We get a QB of a 11-5 team in our Division versus dumping a QB of a 4-12 team.
Oh yeah.. in the 3 months since the end of the season, McNabb suddenly has nothing left?

Reid wanted McNabb, but was outvoted by their FO. Reid made sure to do right by DM, so he is a Redskin.

This has been all over the interwebs and sports stations.

Posted by: Curzon417 | April 5, 2010 10:07 PM
=============
gotta wonder if Reid wanted to "do right" by his guy, DM, AND stick it to his own FO by allowing him to go to an interconference rival to show DM still has something left and that Reid was right. Weirder things have happened. Especially when there is friction between a Coach/GM and the FO.

ZEKE'S UNIQUE PERSPECTIVES --- SPECIAL EDITION
Brought to you by the special people at Yahoo!

Part 1

Donovan McNabb. It’ll take a while getting used to the idea of not hating him. The deal is done, but was it a good deal? Clearly, he is an upgrade over Campbell. McNabb will deservedly get serious consideration for the HOF.

Most of this trade hinges on how long McNabb plays effectively. McNabb turns 34 this coming Thanksgiving week.

So I did some looking at QBs 34 and older. Here is the list of QBs 34 and older that played significantly (150 or more passes) in 2009.

That’s 14 players. Next, I looked at their careers, specifically how many ‘very good’ years they had. My arbitrary cutoff was a QB rating of 90 or better. McNabb has 3 90+ seasons so far. So I culled the list down to the QBs that had between 2 and 4 seasons of a QB rating of 90+ prior to age 34. The list reduced to 5 names – all players with multiple Pro Bowl appearances in order to get McNabb’s ‘peer group’.

This ‘peer group’ contains Hasselbeck, Warner, Garcia, Green and Chandler. All have been to at least 2 Pro Bowls. Hasselback’s career isn’t over, so the analysis slightly underestimates the length of remaining career, but has little impact on the quality of the career. Of note, of the 14 QBs I started with, only Favre was ‘too good’ for the group, the rest weren’t good enough.

After turning 34, these 5 guys played 20 more seasons with over 150 pass attempts. 7 seasons resulted in passer ratings over 90, 6 more in ratings between 80 and 90. The other 6 had ratings below 80.

So what does this suggest for McNabb? 4 more seasons. 1 very good, 1 good, 1 not very good and 1 tbd.

He ended up with the Skins because McNabb has one year left on his current deal and refused to sign an extension with either Buffalo or the Raiders and neither team was going to give up a 2nd rounder to rent him for one season. We gave them the best deal and McNabb was willing to sign here long term.

OK, so what about the trade? Shanahan knew Campbell wasn’t going to be his QB. Then it came down to options. It’s likely the only other serious QB candidate was Bradford and the price was too high. The Rams decision to release Bulger only adds credence to this. I think this trade was the smarter and lower risk choice among the QB options out there – Bradford, Clausen, Tebow, etc.

Still, I’m not crazy about this trade, or for that matter, how the 2 degrees (BA and MS) have approached this offseason. Shanahan is a brilliant coach, not as brilliant as a personnel guy.

Let’s start with McNabb’s record vs the NFC East since 2005. Its 11-15. Nothing to rave about there -- it is barely better than the Skins who were 12-18 versus the East in that same time period. If I get a QB, I’d like him to be successful in my division. Recent history isn’t favorable.

The trade has a modestly negative impact on the #4 pick in the draft, as teams no longer expect Washington to take a QB. It gives other teams some added leverage in dealing with us and slightly reduces our chance to get the best OT in the draft.

More significantly, it hurts our ability to get a 2nd OT in this draft, which we also badly need, with the #37 pick. Rumors that the pick could have been traded to the Ravens for Gaither, a very good OT (if there aren’t other issues there) would have been a better use of the pick, as the problems at OT are severe on both the left and right sides. There would be a good quality OT available with the #37 pick. Also, we gave up a pick in 2011, probably a 3rd round pick, the sort of spot we could look for a center to replace the aging Rabach. Two picks, both that would have made a lot of sense to use for OL, are gone.

If I’m going to be critical, then the least I can do is offer up my alternative approach.

In 2009, Campbell dealt with 10 different OL starters, 4 different RB starters and 3 different play callers (in the same game). He had 2 different #2 WR starters, 2 different TE starters and 2 different GMs. And Jim Zorn was the coach. Yet, Campbell was in the top ½ of the league in QB rating and 3rd in rushing by a QB, averaging 5+ a carry. All in all, a credible year amid incredible dysfunction. I stick with Campbell, despite his flaws.

I would have used most every pick on the OL, our area of greatest need. The #4 and #37 would have gone for OT, either by pick or trade. With our 3 remaining picks, 2 would have gone OL (probably G and OT). I would have kept Quinton Ganther, he had 3 rushing TDs in 62 carries, which is 2 more rushing TDs than Portis+LJ+Parker had in 400 carries! Ganther is younger and hungrier.

The bottom line for me is this deal didn’t fix what is most broken. It actually makes it harder to fix what is most broken. We get a better QB and a worse OL.

Using McNabb’s peer group, its reasonable, perhaps optimistic, to project 2 seasons of 90+ QB rating and 1 more season with a QB rating in the 80’s.

McNabb’s QB ratings the last 2 years were 86 and 93. Campbell was 84 and 86. McNabb was better, but hardly a ‘night and day’ difference. And McNabb had better quality everything, RBs, WRs, OL, coaching and stability. The difference in coaching between Andy Reid and Mike Shanahan is modest. Between Jim Zorn and Shahanan – that IS a ‘night and day’ difference.

While each situation is different, its hard not to flashback to Bruce Smith, Jason Taylor and Deion Sanders. In the Snyder era, acquiring ‘HOF quality’ vets in their 30’s has set this team back, not moved it forward. Will McNabb break the spell? Maybe. Hopefully. Did Mark Brunell, who also came here at age 34 -- also for a 2nd round pick, break the spell?

Bottom line, could this trade work? Yes. McNabb is a fine QB and if he plays several more years at a high level, it will go down as a very good deal. However, unless the OL improves dramatically (with limited help from the draft) and the RBs get better with age, it’s a bit risky given the probable upside is modest. If it was me pulling the trigger, I’d have looked for an OT instead.

And that is a wrap on the McNabb special edition of ZEKE'S UNIQUE PERSPECTIVES
As always, brought to you by the special people at Yahoo!

"Dawkins is the best example of how the Eagles might misevaluate a veteran's ability and worth. They decided to not competitively bid for his services and lost him to Denver, where he made the Pro Bowl this season as the Eagles' defense faltered."

zcezcest1 wrote;
OK, so what about the trade? Shanahan knew Campbell wasn’t going to be his QB. Then it came down to options. It’s likely the only other serious QB candidate was Bradford and the price was too high. The Rams decision to release Bulger only adds credence to this. I think this trade was the smarter and lower risk choice among the QB options out there – Bradford, Clausen, Tebow, etc.
Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 5, 2010 10:25 PM
========================
agreed..
4-5 years of ProBowler McNabb left in his tank.. And/Or pick a QB in the 1st round who will be a Free Agent in 4-5 years and as such you may not keep anyway. And add to that the odds of a Franchise QB obtained in the 1st round is around 35 percent. This was a good Deal.

Or another way to look at it.. Best available QB at #4 was available at #37 and the Skins still have their #4.

If Okung is gone at #4 we should take Bulaga instead. Most mock drafts have him gone at #5 or 6, so why is he a reach for us at #4? He will be the best remaining OT on the board for our system, take him at #4, then exhale and smile.

Trade JC 17 for a 3rd or 4th rounder.

or...

Package JC 17 and Haynesworth for Oakland's #8 in the 1st round, and trade that pick back for more picks. (or take Spiller or McClain - we rockin' then!)

got to wonder how Snyder feels..
His blockbuster pick of the last decade.. Jason Campbell in 2005 for 3 picks (1st, 3rd and 4th) has been declared a complete failure by his hand-picked Head Coach, Shanahan.

The 2005 Draft maneuvers to get JC has to go down as the worst Draft Day blunder in Redskins history.

got to wonder how Snyder feels..
His blockbuster pick of the last decade.. Jason Campbell in 2005 for 3 picks (1st, 3rd and 4th) has been declared a complete failure by his hand-picked Head Coach, Shanahan.

The 2005 Draft maneuvers to get JC has to go down as the worst Draft Day blunder in Redskins history.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | April 5, 2010 10:46 PM

As I recall Gibbs was the one that really wanted Campbell. Gibbs was a great coach, but his history of draft talent evaluations is not good.

got to wonder how Snyder feels..
His blockbuster pick of the last decade.. Jason Campbell in 2005 for 3 picks (1st, 3rd and 4th) has been declared a complete failure by his hand-picked Head Coach, Shanahan.

The 2005 Draft maneuvers to get JC has to go down as the worst Draft Day blunder in Redskins history.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | April 5, 2010 10:46 PM

As I recall Gibbs was the one that really wanted Campbell. Gibbs was a great coach, but his history of draft talent evaluations is not good.

The Shanaplan. Some on here do not believe that this FO has a plan or they can't figure out what kind of plan he has. This is leading many to be frustrated by the signings and especially this trade because the moves are not following the plans these bloggers have outlined as the needs of the Skins.

Why is it so difficult to let the off-season finish before making any judgments on who is signed or traded for? Why not see who actually makes the 53 man roster before yelling that DS is still calling the shots?

None of the "experts" have a clue what MS is planning, much less some bloggers on a blog. Perhaps MS has a plan that he is sticking to and it will not be complete until the end of preseason. Time to believe in the Shanaplan. Have a little patients and believe.

i thought all teams tried to win now no matter whats going on...if your not whats the point?

Posted by: leevi98 | April 5, 2010 10:57 PM |

I agree with that to an extent. Because if I agreed with it fully, then I would be cosigning on the previous FOs dealings as Vinny was trying to win by buying the best players. Anyways, then you'd agree that making a move for McNabb should be evaluated at year end since this move was an all in move for this year, not for a rebuild three years down the road.

got to wonder how Snyder feels..
His blockbuster pick of the last decade.. Jason Campbell in 2005 for 3 picks (1st, 3rd and 4th) has been declared a complete failure by his hand-picked Head Coach, Shanahan.

The 2005 Draft maneuvers to get JC has to go down as the worst Draft Day blunder in Redskins history.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | April 5, 2010 10:46 PM

As I recall Gibbs was the one that really wanted Campbell. Gibbs was a great coach, but his history of draft talent evaluations is not good.

Posted by: HokiesSkins | April 5, 2010 10:52 PM

Did I just defend Snyder? Wow, I did. Yikes.

Posted by: HokiesSkins | April 5, 2010 10:56 PM
==============
Snyder made the pick..
Snyder hired / paid Gibbs and Gibbs made the pick.
This admission of "JC doesnt have it".. was a Snyder failure.

So what you just wrote Steve, is that the Skins are limited to only 4 picks? The can't sign any more FAs? So, if during training camp a team cuts a RT, FS, ILB, et cetera et cetera, the Skins can't sign him because we only have 4 picks?

The Shanaplan. Some on here do not believe that this FO has a plan or they can't figure out what kind of plan he has. This is leading many to be frustrated by the signings and especially this trade because the moves are not following the plans these bloggers have outlined as the needs of the Skins.

Why is it so difficult to let the off-season finish before making any judgments on who is signed or traded for? Why not see who actually makes the 53 man roster before yelling that DS is still calling the shots?

None of the "experts" have a clue what MS is planning, much less some bloggers on a blog. Perhaps MS has a plan that he is sticking to and it will not be complete until the end of preseason. Time to believe in the Shanaplan. Have a little patients and believe.

i thought all teams tried to win now no matter whats going on...if your not whats the point?

Posted by: leevi98 | April 5, 2010 10:57 PM |

I agree with that to an extent. Because if I agreed with it fully, then I would be cosigning on the previous FOs dealings as Vinny was trying to win by buying the best players. Anyways, then you'd agree that making a move for McNabb should be evaluated at year end since this move was an all in move for this year, not for a rebuild three years down the road.

Posted by: TWISI | April 5, 2010 11:07 PM | Report abuse

OMG! This has nothing to do whatsoever with PAST FO moves! Ok so in the past other FO structures over paid for vets who did not return the worth of their contract.

WE GET IT! We know it happened but what FA or trade have they made where they have over paid and have high risk? C'mon loose that old argument for the love!

Why is it so hard to admit that Qb play is more important than anything including O-line play?

Posted by: Vicc | April 5, 2010 9:43 PM | Report abuse

I agree as well. However the thing is Both Boldin and Fitzgerald have proved themselves as guys that can produce without a QB. Very few guys in the NFL are capable of doing that. Off the top of my head Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, Roddy White, Brandon Marshall, and Steve Smith are the few guys that will be successful statistically right now without an elite QB (Randy Moss and T.O use to be these types). However with a great QB they reach a whole other level.

Warner was just the icing on the cake when they found out he could still play at a high level. However if I remember right Boldin for example got over a 1,000 yards his rookie year with Jeff Blake throwing to him.

In talking to several front office executives and an NFL talent evaluator, there was a unanimous opinion: The Redskins upgraded in a major way at quarterback by getting McNabb on Sunday night. And none of them thought the price (a second-round pick this year and either a third or a fourth rounder next year) was steep.

...

"The quarterback is everything," the GM said. "You can't evaluate your team until you get a quarterback. Now in their minds they can certainly be a contender. They're in it to win now and they have a good three-year window with McNabb. He's still on. His game is still his game and he still has good years left."

The comment about the past FO is not my main point. I guess I need to get more to the point with you tonight. The McNabb trade should be judged on merit this year, not future years because McNabb was brought in to the team into division contenders, and superbowl contenders this year. Great I get that and I am all for it. Again, I AM ALL FOR IT. However, if McNabbs injury issues continue to occur, or if the skins fail to address the OL adequately because of minimum draft choices, or if they mortgage more of the future to address the OL adequately because of minimum draft choices this; and the skins falter the FO should be judge on this move accordingly. The opposite would be true as well.

I've been reading without comments for awhile. Time to chime in. Agree that its hard to root for Mcknabb, but how can anyone not see the benefits of this. Better at reading defenses, coverage, quicker release and decision making. Throws a better deep ball, lob and dump off to the backs.Very high td/int ratio.Never had any running game ever. Leader in the huddle. MS doesn't want to develop aQB, his heir apparent, Kyle does, solet him pick his QB of the future in thenext 2 yrs. Is it that hard to comprehend?

Posted by: League-Source | April 5, 2010 11:39 PM
================
my favorite story of what Duke University is all about.... They even sued their own founders and benefactors, the Duke family, for more money from the estate, in the late 1990's after Doris died. Nice condolences.. Corporate evil Personified.

Yeah, because the terrapins did really good in the tournament this year. Rolled over like turtles. Go, Duke!

Posted by: League-Source | April 5, 2010 11:41 PM

terps had a helluva lot better season than i thought they were gonna have, and any season they hang a loss on the eventual national champs is a good one. i don't front-run for anybody. i say again, F Duke.

Also, Reinhardt was getting better last year before he got hurt and E. Eilliams was looked at by Buges as Rabachs eventual replacement. Very young players. mike Williams will be much stronger and faster this year after his accomplishment last year with weight and conditioning. Hicks will be a very versatile jack of all positions. The young kid that we signed first this year is a good lineman MS had already drafted before. our 3 OLD rb's fill a need each,ie: wp-pass catch and speed,CP blcking and something to prove, LJ-short yrdage, etc. We hadno one to do these things before. All wide receivers get better with DM. Moss will be sick as the slot.We wil get our tackle because DET. just traded for Sims andwill draft DT.Have patience, people.

Assuming that is true, the Skins could have their OL in place if they select an OT on day 1 if the draft even with the crew of OLmen from last year. I think they still would need to find a swing tackle (don't mention Heyer) else the run the risk of playing musical chairs again.

Why is it so hard to admit that Qb play is more important than anything including O-line play?

Posted by: Vicc | April 5, 2010 9:43 PM | Report abuse

Vicc I agree with everything you have said today. good posting.....

they don't get it man :)

Posted by: leevi98 | April 5, 2010 9:45 PM | Report abuse

You two idiots must be slow and obviously have never played a down of football in your lives. there is no QB without the fat guys up front. there is no running game without the fat guys up front. The reason I know you never played football is because the fat guys on your team would have made you pay for thinking QB play is what drives a team. Every team I was ever on had respect for its lineman. How many teams in the last 10 years have won superbowls with sorry QBs great running games (lines) and great defense. Learn something about the game before you open your fat mouths.

Why is it so hard to admit that Qb play is more important than anything including O-line play?

Posted by: Vicc | April 5, 2010 9:43 PM | Report abuse

Vicc I agree with everything you have said today. good posting.....

they don't get it man :)

Posted by: leevi98 | April 5, 2010 9:45 PM | Report abuse

You two idiots must be slow and obviously have never played a down of football in your lives. there is no QB without the fat guys up front. there is no running game without the fat guys up front. The reason I know you never played football is because the fat guys on your team would have made you pay for thinking QB play is what drives a team. Every team I was ever on had respect for its lineman. How many teams in the last 10 years have won superbowls with sorry QBs great running games (lines) and great defense. Learn something about the game before you open your fat mouths.

It's not likely that Okung will be available at no. 4 unless Detroit or Tampa Bay decide that they prefer someone else. But it's not inconceivable that the Redskins could trade up with Detroit. I wonder if Detroit would be willing to take one of the Redskins' low round draft picks in addition to no. 4. The Redskins only have picks in rounds 4, 5, and 7, but maybe they could get more picks if a Campbell trade is made before draft day. Or maybe Detroit would settle for picks in the 2011 draft.

Everybody....keep your fingers crossed about drafting Okung. He sure seems like a can't miss pick to me. It also sure looks like the skins have bailed on Jason Campbell. Maybe they can obtain some more draft picks or VET OL by trading him.

Vicc I'm sorry if it might seem that I'm targeting you, but if Bill Parcell heard you talk, he would slap you upside your head. You wrote,"I'm pretty sure other organizations are successful because of their QB play." Also, " Why is it so hard to admit that QB play is more important than anything including O-line play."

Without your O-LINE, especially your CENTER making the adjustments for the Guards and Tackles, your QB play would suffer greatly. Without a decent line, you don't have a running game, and the defense can tee off on you anytime they want to. I think the Steelers and Ravens,Giants, Eagles,Patriots, and Cowboys would prove you wrong on that. All that QB is going to do is get sacked, turn it over, or throw it away. Organization aren't just strong because of their QB play. If your FO sucks like our for years, the players don't respect you and the coaches don't respect you. Football is 11 men on offense and defense, and no single player wins a game by himself. For years, the Redskins have picked up other people garbage, and they failed miserably, and left with deep pockets. Think the last time I checked, there's no I in TEAM.

ElYeah, did you really just say that the Steelers and Eagles have good offensive lines?? I guess you didn't watch too much football the last 2 years. Their QBs Big Ben and Donovan made the OL's look good with their scrambling ability. You want to know besides the fact that you see the QBs running for their lives on every play. Their running games were very average or non exsistant. We just got a QB who will make our OL look good.

If we draft Okung and take another OL or 2 in the draft for more competition along the OL we should be good. I can honestly say I am comfortable with Heyer at Rt if we draft Okung because I know we have one of the most mobile QBs in the game Donovan. We have a QB with some of the best pocket presence in the game and his mobility in the pocket and out will help this team out immensely.

Bruce Allen, the Shanahans, Hasslet and Donovan McNabb!! Yeah boys! So excited and i'm actually going to say that Snyder has done a good job this offseason. It is not a fly by the pants jsut take the most expensive guy out there.

Take OKUNG whats all the fuss about and all these different assumptions. Take the best OT avaiable , i dont care if its King king brother. We need 2 offensive linemen so, i dont wanna hear all this chatter about BERRY(the next pro bowler) We got safieties. No more Safety talk. runnin back talk, QB talk . We need OL, LINEbackers for 3-4maybe another cornerback